Bloom on Books, Reading, and the Determination of Greatness: A Critique and an Alternative

The place of the canon in institutions of higher education has been a matter for considerable debate in recent years. While there are important variations between different conservative positions in the battle over university reading requirements, many traditionalists assume that texts should be selected purely on the basis of their literary or philosophical merit, and that some people are able to objectively distinguish "Great Books" from those of lesser value. This paper concentrates on Allan Bloom's version of this thesis. Bloom suggests that "writers of quality" know other writers of quality. The author argues that Bloom's analysis is premised on a problematic theory of legitimation, a flawed conception of greatness, and a restrictive view of possibilities for reading at the university level. An alternative position - one based on the Freirean view of critical reading - is advanced.